AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket Server comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Atlassian are both solutions in the Version Control category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #5 with an average rating of 7.9, while Atlassian is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 7.0% mindshare in VC, compared to Atlassian’s 28.2% mindshare. Additionally, 80% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 85% of Atlassian users who would recommend it.

AWS CodeCommit

Read 10 AWS CodeCommit reviews

1,300 Views
1,145 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

Bitbucket Server

Read 26 Bitbucket Server reviews

3,934 Views
3,696 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

AWS CodeCommit

Bitbucket Server

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 24, 2024

Bitbucket Server and AWS CodeCommit are competitive products in version control solutions for software development teams. AWS CodeCommit has an edge due to its seamless integration with AWS services and robust security features, though Bitbucket Server is preferred for its ease of use with Atlassian tools.

Features: Bitbucket Server offers powerful Jira integration, customizable workflows, and extensive pull request capabilities for efficient collaboration. AWS CodeCommit is notable for automatic scalability, integrated AWS security measures, and flexible repository management.

Room for Improvement: Bitbucket Server could enhance its user interface and improve native features like CI/CD capabilities. It also requires a more straightforward scaling option for larger teams. AWS CodeCommit could benefit from more intuitive collaboration tools and streamlined integration with non-AWS services. Enhancing version control capabilities to cater to broader user needs would also be advantageous.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Bitbucket Server offers versatile deployment, including on-premises options suitable for enterprises with specific security requirements, supported by Atlassian's configuration-focused support. AWS CodeCommit simplifies deployment with a fully managed service, backed by AWS's broad support network, making it easier for AWS-native teams.

Pricing and ROI: Bitbucket Server requires upfront investment for on-premises hosting and scales licensing with team size, yielding high ROI with Atlassian tool integration. AWS CodeCommit operates on a pay-as-you-go model, appealing to growing teams with its scalability and cost-efficient AWS infrastructure, potentially offering higher ROI through integration benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,713 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

AWS CodeCommit

Ranking in Version Control

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Bitbucket Server

Ranking in Version Control

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Version Control category, the mindshare of AWS CodeCommit is 7.0%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Bitbucket Server is 28.2%, up from 22.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Version Control

Featured Reviews

Munisaiteja Narravula

AWS Engineer at 6thgen

Efficient integration of code changes with seamless private repository management

AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly. It doesn't require any complex authentication, which makes the process seamless. Deployments happen in a straightforward manner once the code is organized correctly in the repository. The platform allows the creation of private repositories, securing and restricting access to our team members only. This ensures that unauthorized users cannot access sensitive files. AWS CodeCommit also integrates well when we use it with Check Point allowing us to implement information in the criteria we need.

Read full review

Dileep DK

Head of Engineering - Consumer Finance at DBS Bank

Facilitates efficient branching and integration with flexible workflow management

Bitbucket Server excels as a versioning system, effectively managing branching and code integration. It provides flexibility, allowing teams to customize workflows according to their specific needs. We maintain a master branch for production and separate branches for different features, which makes it easier to manage code changes. Additionally, its integration with Jenkins pipelines for automating builds and performing various checks enhances its utility.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"It helps us to install our code idea projects."

"AWS CodeCommit is much easier to use than Bitbucket. It doesn't require any personal password or these things. We just need to put in our AWS account password and username."

"AWS CodeCommit is simple and cheap."

"AWS CodeCommit's user interface is nice, and it's easy for people to pick up."

"The customer service is pretty good."

"The solution scalable."

"AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly."

"The customer service and support for AWS CodeCommit are excellent."

More AWS CodeCommit pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is server management."

"It can efficiently promote code to different environments."

"It is an amazingly stable solution."

"Our code is secure."

"Its integration with Jenkins pipelines for automating builds and performing various checks enhances its utility."

"Bitbucket Server supports code collaboration by providing commands developers can use to check in code. Through comments, developers can specify the purpose of the code check-in. Additionally, Bitbucket allows tagging of code for releases."

"Bitbucket Server integrates well with other products."

"The product is easy to maintain."

More Bitbucket Server pros

Cons

"There are some options in Bitbucket that are not available in AWS CodeCommit. For example, code reviewer. We can't add a code reviewer in AWS CodeCommit, and we can't fork the repository online. These are the two things that Bitbucket has, but the solution doesn't have. Also, Jira has a debugging option that AWS CodeCommit doesn't have. Another thing is that Bitbucket charges three dollars per month per user. Compared with AWS CodeCommit, that only charges one dollar per month. So, AWS CodeCommit is cheaper than Bitbucket. But it does not have enough features that Bitbucket has. Additionally, it will be good if you upload one video or documentation on how to use AWS CodeCommit for beginners. That will be more helpful. There you can add more details about pricing. There are not many details about pricing. Bitbucket has a table where they have mentioned everything in detail, like, what features for how much price, how much longer you can use and how many users can use."

"The tool should improve its UI."

"Although CodeCommit's user interface is good, it can be improved when compared to other version controls like GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket."

"There is room for improvement in how AWS CodeCommit handles mass changes, like Fortran, which is designed to make these alterations in a friendly manner across AWS requirements."

"Not really that much stands out. I am using CodeCommit since my customer asked me to use it. It is just an appliance, and GitHub and GitLab can do a better job."

"The solution could be more user-friendly and cheaper."

"Lately, it is turning out to be a little expensive. The market is preferring Azure because it offers resources at a much cheaper price."

"When I compare code, AWS has a cap on the file size, and that size is pretty small compared to what GitHub and GitLab provide."

More AWS CodeCommit cons

"The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."

"There might be further integration ideas for continuous deployment."

"We opted for the on-premises solution, and while it's quite expensive, I believe there's room for improvement in terms of pricing."

"Currently, the interface could benefit from a more sophisticated code viewing option."

"The improvements in the product could be made to expand third-party integrations and enhance support for open-source projects."

"The product requires patching and version improvements. Some functions do not work properly when we move from one version to another. We need a technical improvement. Also, communicating with other Atlassian products becomes cumbersome when we move from one version to another. I want Bitbucket Server to include a dashboard similar to Jira's. Atlassian must also develop a tool to scan our complete base for vulnerabilities."

"At the moment, there are not many details on how to proceed with the troubleshooting if one of the users faces an issue with the product."

"The user experience is tedious and long-winded. It could also be smoother from an admin's perspective."

More Bitbucket Server cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."

"AWS CodeCommit is competitively priced against all the other competitors."

"As for pricing, you can add the table in detail. You can visit Bitbucket or refer to any other tools. There, you can see what is the difference between your pricing and other prices. You have only mentioned it in a single line. Other tools have been mentioned in a table format, like, how many users, premium, normal accounts, and other things."

"We opted for the on-premises solution, and while it's quite expensive, I believe there's room for improvement in terms of pricing. The licensing is based on the number of users, but I'm not entirely certain about the details."

"We pay around $6 per user."

"The tool's licensing costs are yearly. Prices can become expensive if you have a lot of users."

"One needs to pay towards the licensing charges associated with the product."

"Bitbucket Server is quite expensive compared to other products."

"The platform offers a free version for public repositories, which benefits open-source projects."

"As for licensing, Bitbucket is one of the more affordable options."

"The solution comes as a part of the suite."

More Bitbucket Server pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Version Control solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

10%

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is simple and cheap.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS CodeCommit?

Lately, it is turning out to be a little expensive. The market is preferring Azure because it offers resources at a much cheaper price. Compared to Azure, AWS is more expensive, and that's the trend.

See all answers

What needs improvement with AWS CodeCommit?

There is room for improvement in Insight Analytics. A built-in dashboard with advanced analytics, like commit frequencies and pull request trends, could be added. These features would help gain dee...

See all answers

What do you like most about Bitbucket Server?

The product is easy to maintain.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Bitbucket Server?

While Bitbucket Server performs well, the improvement lies not in the tool itself yet in the discipline of the team using it. The tool does not impose restrictions, allowing for flexibility in work...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Bitbucket Server?

Bitbucket Server is used for private code management and source code management. It facilitates versioning, allowing us to maintain a master branch which reflects the code in production, and manage...

See all answers

Comparisons

Bitbucket vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 73% of the time

GitHub vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 22% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 5% of the time

More AWS CodeCommit Competitors

Bitbucket vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 97% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 3% of the time

More Bitbucket Server Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit

February 2025

Download AWS CodeCommit product report

Buyer's Guide

Bitbucket Server

February 2025

Download Bitbucket Server product report

Also Known As

CodeCommit

Stash

Overview

AWS CodeCommit is a fully-managed source control service that hosts secure Git-based repositories. It makes it easy for teams to collaborate on code in a secure and highly scalable ecosystem. CodeCommit eliminates the need to operate your own source control system or worry about scaling its infrastructure. You can use CodeCommit to securely store anything from source code to binaries, and it works seamlessly with your existing Git tools.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Bitbucket Server is a preferred choice for managing source code and version control, facilitating development workflows like CI/CD, task tracking, and collaboration among teams.

Organizations use Bitbucket Server to handle multiple repositories, manage code pipelines, and support various development workflows including CI/CD deployment. Integration with Jenkins and Jira enhances the software development lifecycle, meeting specific project requirements. Key features include user-friendly management, ease of use, and private repositories, fostering efficient code promotion and collaboration. However, improvements are needed in command-line functionality, UI, log handling, and integration with third-party tools.

What are Bitbucket Server's key features?

User-friendly management: Simplifies source code and repository management.
Version control: Effective tool for tracking and managing code changes.
Code collaboration: Facilitates teamwork and peer reviews.
CI/CD pipeline support: Enables automated deployment processes.
Seamless integration: Works well with tools like Jenkins and Jira.
Private repositories: Secure storage for project code bases.

What benefits should users expect?

Performance: Reliable and stable performance for development tasks.
Task tracking: Efficient management of development workflows.
Code promotion: Smooth transition of code across environments.
Enhanced collaboration: Improved teamwork and communication.

In industries like software development and IT services, Bitbucket Server implementation varies. Companies may integrate it into DevOps workflows for continuous integration and deployment. It's also used in sectors requiring stringent version control and collaboration, ensuring efficient project management and delivery.

Atlassian

Sample Customers

Edmunds, Gett, ClicksMob

Netflix, Nasa, Rakuten, Best Buy, Philips, Nordstrom, Intuit, Zillow, Citi.

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server

January 2025

Free Report: AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server

Find out what your peers are saying about AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server report.

See our list of best Version Control vendors.

We monitor all Version Control reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.